New Delhi: The Supreme Court has expressed serious concern over the extraordinary delay by the Allahabad High Court in deciding a criminal appeal filed by a murder convict, nearly 41 years after it was first lodged.
A partial working day Bench comprising Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and A.S. Chandurkar on Monday described the situation as troubling and raised questions about how the growing pendency of cases in the Allahabad High Court can be effectively addressed.
The case relates to Vijay Singh, who was arrested in November 1983 at the age of 28 for allegedly shooting his brother dead. A sessions court in Kanpur convicted him of murder and sentenced him to life imprisonment in December 1985.
Singh challenged the conviction before the Allahabad High Court, but his appeal remained pending for almost four decades. The High Court finally dismissed the appeal through a 20-page judgment delivered on February 9, 2026.
During the hearing, the Supreme Court noted that Singh had spent only about three months in custody and had remained on bail for nearly 43 years while awaiting the outcome of his appeal. The top court decided to continue his bail during the pendency of proceedings before it.
The Bench observed that prolonged delays in the Allahabad High Court have become a recurring issue, with litigants frequently approaching the Supreme Court seeking directions for expedited hearings due to the massive backlog of cases.
Justice Mishra sought suggestions from senior advocate Siddharth Dave and advocate Zoheb Hossain on possible ways to reduce the pendency of old matters. During the discussion, Dave suggested that prosecution appeals pending for more than three decades could be dismissed to help clear the backlog.
However, the Bench rejected the proposal, stating that cases cannot be dismissed merely because they have remained pending for a long period. The judges emphasized that such an approach would violate fundamental principles of justice and could harm public interest by denying parties a fair opportunity to present their case.
In his appeal before the Supreme Court, Singh highlighted the impact of the prolonged delay on his life. Now 72 years old, he argued that he has spent his youth, middle age and old age living under the shadow of a criminal conviction while waiting for his appeal to be decided.
His plea stated that for more than four decades he endured the uncertainty associated with the pending criminal proceedings, making the case a stark example of the challenges posed by judicial delays in India’s legal system.
The Supreme Court’s observations have once again brought attention to the issue of case pendency and the need for systemic reforms to ensure timely delivery of justice.
